Spoilerific

If any of you spoil the epic quest I will die and have my ghost haunt you forever. Just saying. You've been coming dangerously close at some points. I've got my eye on you.

Yeah... sorry about that. Now go do the epic quest so you know what we're talking about. Anyway.

I have to strongly disagree with you. In Hallifax, we do something because it works, not because it's 'good' or 'evil'. These things are kept secret because it's information that could be used against us by our enemies, not because we don't want people to know how evil we are.

Yeah, people keep using the "Hallifax is good" or "Hallifax is evil" thing. Hallifax does what's good for Hallifax, and what's good for Hallifax is good for the Basin. Your system of morals is outdated and illogical, so shut up and take your medicine.

As to the Collective, it's neither good nor bad, either. It doesn't need 'redeeming features.' It exists because it helps Hallifax work more efficiently. (From an OOC point of view, I agree! It's an awful horrible thing that I'd never want to live under in real life! Fortunately, this isn't real life!)

^^Also, this. If you've listened to the Conclave, you've heard a 'recorded' conversation where the Conclave was talking about Celest attacking Hallifax because it learned about how certain things in Hallifax really work. That's why said things are kept secret: they are a liability when it comes to relating to people who don't see things quite the same way Hallifax does.

This is just something of curiosity, but it's been stated that Hallifax is a city of "The ends justify the means."

What happens then when your ends don't justify the means? What do you do when shoveling another baby into the furnace doesn't actually make the time machine work? What happens when the effectiveness and efficiency are in question?

Because based off of this thread, I just see an awful lot of players explaining Hallifax by tooting their own horn. In a city of science, where's the empirical evidence?

If it doesn't work and we thought it would, of it doesn't work and we were just doing it for the hell of it?

The first one, probably a "whoops, oh well. At least we know not to do that next time!". The second, you'd probably be reprimanded for wasting resources. If you're just being destructive and out of control on a whim, you're likely going to be put in for re-education.

below is effectively my answer to why there is the cover up.




As to what redeeming feature does hallifax have?

Science primarily, what is developed in Hallifax may have uses that could one day save the basin, just as you can go the route of the mad-scientist you could just as easily go the route of the ecologist who works to ensure that the basin itself is protected on the grounds that maintaining the ecology will provide a benefit to the future of Hallifax. There is a logical reason for the action and it is something that can be seen as "good".

At the end of the day, it's not really about the outcomes. It's how you get there, Hallifax might do something that is evil for something that is good effectively adhering to "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one"

I believe we're normally given examples with estimated death rates and the like. It's not that hallifax would just keep throwing servants into the bottomless pit, the number of servants that would be assigned to a project would be determined beforehand, if more are required then the project heads would need to bring proof of the requirement and then it would be reconsidered.

Also, not every project is going to require some act of "evil" it's actually harder to get through a project that could result in the loss of living resources because you have to justify the expected losses and the city needs to be able to afford it. I don't think anyone has come up with a project that has actually required deaths yet. Though some servants may have died while building the bridges.

If one really wanted to make Hallifax evil, one might look through the histories and events, and note that pretty much every time the world was almost destroyed, it was because of people doing things that seemed like a good way to advance science, learning, industry, etc. Of course, that's not Hallifax's fault. The principles are valid; they can't help being in a world whose author happens to love-to-pieces the Lovecraft/Bradbury/etc. storyline and thus cause things to happen to go dangerously badly so often.

Really, I agree with Ileein that good and evil are simply not the point, and as I said before, that's what's so great about Hallifax, that it's about something we haven't done to death.

This whole thread is reminding me I have a Huge Evil Science Project that I should probably finish writing up.

Its also nice because I haven't felt quite as forced into a character with Hallifax as I have in other orgs. If I want to do a nice happy "let's explore the planes and learn things!" project I can do that and not have to have some evil focus but I can also feel comfortable helping Ileein dissect a viscanti child, or at least sign off on getting him some indentured servants to experiment on.

I think it was Kira who mentioned that the Collective knows it is evil and is trying to cover it up, but I think it's really about protecting the image and keeping itself viable. I wouldn't have a problem telling Mag about some experiment that involved inflicting pain on an innocent for scientific gain, but I probably wouldn't call up the Star Council to let them know what I was doing. It's all about knowing what's appropriate for the audience. I may not be worried about what's right or wrong, but is this going to piss off Mag/Glom/Seren/Celest is an important consideration.

I can only speak from my perspective which is in the Sentinels.

Upfront you have the mask of protectors of Hallifax and what not. Then you have what is behind the mask which is the Ministry of Peace. It is the perception of the first that facilitates the latter. It's like the mom in that book flowers in the attic..... Sort of.

And challenging Phoebus authority at the Matrix is fun cause it allows me to complete my file on her.....

Man, you people are killing me here. There are six major orgs!

I left out Gaudiguch because in most circumstances, it wouldn't be important to worry if Gaudi would disagree. It's sort of a given than they are going to hate it anyway.

Dare I say Gaudiguch has had issues with being regarded as a legitimate, serious organization in the past?

But we don't care what Gaudiguch thinks of us, so why take them into consideration?

*points at Aicuthi's previous post*
*points at past changes in political landscapes*
*points at a rabbit just for shiggles*

No, there aren't.